Reply #62: You're welcome [View All]

[BeFree]

"So, umm, aren't you the one who is saying that E/M is full of bull?"

Yeah, ya got that, eh? E/M is full of bull. The early exit polls (read raw) had no E/M bull applied to them. The last poll reeked of E/M. The first numbers were raw - without the E/M. So now they are covering their asses because the weight they applied to the data stinks. Their wiggling reminds me of a child being potty trained.

"..the results that were released on cnn.com as polls closed.."

See you are not one the same page as me. I am talking about the data that was released before the polls closed and the raw data that had no weighting applied, and you are talking about the data that was

"... weighted in various ways,..."

Using the term 'auditing' to describe the exit polling is a bit of a stretch. But really, why pay $10mil for something that if they wait till midnight can be had for free? I remember the previous pollsters being put out of business because they had numbers that didn't match the diebold numbers in 2002. E/M learned that lesson and figured for $10mil they'd best try to meet the diebold numbers. Unfortunately for them, raw data got leaked before they had a chance to weight it down. Unfortunate for them, but good for democracy.

Too, can you think of any other audit of the vote besides the exit-polls? If not, that means we have no audit.... any wise man would say we need some kind of audit and for years we kinda relied on the exit-polls to be that 'some kind of audit'. Now you say there was no audit whatsoever?